RicOlie_2 said:
moviefreakedmind said:
RicOlie_2 said:
Warbler said:
RicOlie_2 said:
Warbler said:
Okay, I’ve decided to return and see how things go.
HI RicOlie_2!
btw, did you see moviefreakedmind’s new avatar? What do you think of it?
Hi!
I saw his avatar, but wasn’t really sure what it was till now. Actually, I’m still not entirely sure what it’s supposed to be depicting.
It is a pic of Sinead O Connor when she tore apart the pic of Pope John Paul II on Saturday Night Live.
Ah. It makes me sad more than anything, that people would think that way about such a holy pope and about the Church. I wasn’t familiar with that particular incident on SNL, so I looked it up and watched part of an interview with Sinéad. What a deluded human being. It’s terrible that she had to suffer abuse as a child, though. It sounds like that was the main source of her attitude towards the Church.
It makes me sad more than anything that that man is viewed a “such a holy pope.” His complicity in the mass child rape and the Church’s cover-up of the mass child rape makes him an accessory at the absolute best, and likely far, far worse. I’d call his defenders the deluded human beings. Before anyone claims I’m being mean or “bigoted” for the use of the word deluded, I’d like to point out that I, since I hold the same position as Sinéad, was called deluded first. This isn’t the thread for such statements so I won’t state how I really feel about John Paul II, but since I’m kind of being implicated in this exchange I felt the need to explain my side. Interestingly, the reason I have this picture is because I was asked to change my old avatar since it made it look like I was a banned user, and for reasons I don’t quite remember anymore I wanted an anti-establishment, fight-the-power image as my avatar so I chose Sinéad.
I don’t want to completely derail this thread, so I’ll keep my responses relatively brief:
I suspect JP II either naïvely gave guilty priests the benefit of the doubt or was simply ignorant of the extent of their wrongdoings. “Mass child rape” is certainly not a fitting expression for atrocities committed by 1% of priests, but I certainly agree that the pope should have done more. I don’t think he was perfect by any means.
Maybe he shouldn’t be considered “such a holy pope” then. Definitely not the Holy Father. I also don’t buy the 1% of priests estimate.
By referring to Sinéad as deluded, I was referring primarily to her claim that child abuse is at the root of all the world’s problems, and her belief that she is Catholic despite rejecting the Catholic Church outright. I get the impression that you’re intelligent enough not to espouse those positions.
I don’t espouse those positions. I think everything should reject the Catholic Church and all other churches outright.
RicOlie_2 said:
Yup. Sin in general is disgusting, but pedophilic abuse of children is pretty close to the top of the list. The fact that so many priests have exploited the trust people have for them is simply horrific, as most priests would agree. Fortunately for its credibility, the Church has never claimed to not be full of hypocrites and sinners, because being Christian doesn’t seem to affect the way some people behave.
Actually, sin in general isn’t that disgusting. The Church does indeed put itself on a moral pedestal.
RicOlie_2 said:
DominicCobb said:
If I remember correctly, the estimate was 6% of priests.
I did a bit more research on it, and it looks like different numbers come from different countries. In Australia, it’s a disgusting 7%. In the US, it’s about 4%. In most countries, though, it’s significantly lower, as far as I can tell, so 1% might not be that far off globally. I can’t find any global statistics to back that up though. By way of anecdotal evidence, however, I think there have been only a handful of cases across western Canada, meaning that significantly less than 1% of priests here are guilty of abuse (in Eastern Canada, the problem is far more severe, unfortunately).
I found this article interesting: http://www.newsweek.com/priests-commit-no-more-abuse-other-males-70625 (the Washington Post also supports that claim).
It isn’t about percentages necessarily, it’s about the coverups and the allowing the rapists to abuse more children rather than turn them in. If I did that, then surely I’d be labelled a criminal and a rape-enabler, but if I claim to be God’s representative on earth, then I’m pardoned? Fascinating. Even the Penn State football coach got totally denounced when it was revealed that he did something similar, and football coaches are essentially gods in the US.
